stumped on this
set security policies from-zone Untrust to-zone DMZ policy 39 match
destination-address metro_80_195_69_29
set security zones security-zone Untrust address-book address
metro_80_195_69_29 80.195.69.29/32
I am commit checking to recieve
commit check
[edit security policies f
many thanks
From: Jerry Jones
To: EVAN WILLIAMS
Cc: j-nsp
Sent: Thursday, 20 June 2013, 14:54
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] SRX Multi topology minimum requirements
On Jun 20, 2013, at 5:12 AM, EVAN WILLIAMS wrote:
Quick two! is Multi-topology supported on SRX
Quick two! is Multi-topology supported on SRX range? what is the minimum
Junos release level?
many thanks in anticipation of a qualified reply.
Evan
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/jun
agreed, Aviva Garrett's book is essential reading,. Do they still have the
study guides available, they IMHO provided an excellent resource to develop
an understanding of the Juniper Man machine interface and the approach to
the underlying protocols deployed.
- Original Message -
seems that what was once a useful source, the well has run dry.
BGP need licencing!!!
licencing and proprietry is Blue Box.
I say get a grip & goodbye. Populate someone else's mailbox with ridiculous
questions. I despair.
unsubscribe me now.
what gets to me is that these people get work
so
what are the limitations on re-using M160 PIC cards, there is a mixture of
SONET from OC3 thru OC48 and ethernet 1000 cards.
Any thoughts
Evan
Beware of any enterprise that requires new clothes. HENRY DAVID THOREAU
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper
good practice to
keep JUNOS and a Compact flash with bootable JUNOS just in case.
Hope this helps and good luck
Evan Williams
- Original Message -
From: "Jared Mauch"
To: "Brad Fleming"
Cc:
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] upgrading M120
any one had an issue with a commit-at causing a scheduled Commit loop. That is
I used commit at but scheduled commit was within 2 minutes, the result was an
error message warning of short interval between the command and scheduled job.
I re-entered at 5 minue interval and we had almost 30 minute
Got this on a M320, apparently this has been around a while, says a minor, but
like to hear if anyone has seen it before and suggestions on how to clear.
below is Junos and system storage.
u...@host> show version invoke-on all-routing-engines
re0:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM
http://www.quotegarden.com/procrastination.html
apologies, a support contract & a pinch of salt might do the trick.
- Original Message -
From: "Travers Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 12:36 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Which Ro
I had no issues using other vendors SFP in a NIT environment and concur that
the only symptom of using a non-Juniper SFP was that the platform recognised
it was a non--juniper SFP. This was especially useful when we were supplied
with only LH and we needed to use SH due to the provision of the '
irrelevant comment, as I am oft to make. I was interested to learn that
another vendor has followed Juniper's (please forgive my ignorance of other
like-minded vendors) lead on this and decide to use the commit, show |
compare and rollback facillity in their IOS-XR releases. I should add that
i
absolutetly Dale,
however I am a telecom engineer, but always say please, thank you and your
welcome to all, as would any fries cook at any major fast food outlet, there
is no difference between me and the guy that serves me . I hope that I treat
him with respect and dignity because he has the t
why concern yourself with these details, at the end of the day it is a quite
simple concept that Juniper created, that is they have developed the ASICs
that do the day to day shifting of routed traffic, based upon a robust
operating system that is loosely based upon the basic routeD and other op
whilst I enjoy the debate of this issue, to disambiguiate (ooh!), IMHO
empirically I have found it is always easier to hard code the settings when
connecting different vendors equipment. The point I make with clause 37 is
that some vendors chose to interpret auto-negotiation in their own
partic
check out clause 37 in auto-negotiation IEEE802 standard, you will need to
explicitly set the speed and duplex settings. Auto-negotiation works for cisco
to cisco and on occasions to HP procufve, far too often the auto-negotiation
fails with other vendors.
Clause 37 says vendors develop their ow
fpga code, IOS, let's face it the blue box archetecture has past its sell by
date. These are word I can only read in the morning.
With Juniper, The hardware will only call the software/firmware it requires.
Consider the Junos Image to be a wardrobe and the hardware picks the clothes
that fit or
i have always found this to be a excellent resource, when looking into the
operation and format of protocols. In general not much meat but enough in the
morsel to help.
http://www.protocols.com/pbook/ppp4.htm#MultiPPP
hope this may but as useful for you as it has been for me, and still is.
Evan
any thoughts on impact of importing 1000s of routes learned from an eigrp
network into a vrf. would route summarization be a better option. to restrict
the number of entities in the bgp.l3vpn table.
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether
AFAIK ip an MPLS network your P routers will run PIM-SSM an multicast groups
will be set up from within the vrf at the respective PEs. The PE nearest the
source will assume RP capability.
Steven Brenchley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I know there is a problem with
auto-rp, as it will not work w
tried using 'traceoptions' under
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos76/swconfig76-routing/frameset.htm
This has many options for tracing state-changes etc., very flexible. thing to
remember is take account of the number of files you wish to maintain and the
size of these files.
I learnt that physical mtu should be as close to 1600 (1604)for expansion of
services or higher , Protocol family mpls I would instinctively add an
additional 26 bytes to 1552. to account for Q in Q and other possible expansion.
The Juniper physical interface MTU is set at a value above the p
I would like to echo the comments and say an excellent resource to have to hand
when you need to find a quick expalnation of what is needed to complete
configuration tasks.
truly an essential part of the toolbox for any engineer, taking on the day to
day configuration and maintenance of Juniper
I think that you are misunderstanding SONET/SDH, maximum bandwidth available
is 149 Mbits due to Multiplexor, regenerator and Path overheads.
consider also the POS framing running at 118 M means 80% utilisation I
would be consider moving traffic from a link running at that traffic level.
-
Maybe PolyglotOS would be an answer, in the old days of Bluebox and wellfleet
as the big boys of the playground, there were many arguments about which was
better, a ready out of the box command line interface (with limited levers and
handles) or the highly customisable (ohh!!) command line avail
think you'll find that these books are pretty generic, and give enough
explanation of how Juniper differs from certain 'Blue' routers. I Found the
junos cookbook quite a valuable resource.
Agree there is nothing like 'hands-on to get to grip with the finer aspects of
Juniper configuration , with
agree with alex & paulo, allowing propagate and decriment ttl allows your users
to see hops in the network and in MPLS LSP deployment why allow them to shoot
you with bullets of your own making. IMHO Best common practice no-propagate/
detriment TTL
BTW found this is a useful guide
http://check
did you have any minimum redundancy configured under chassis config?
- Original Message -
From: "Raniery Pontes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 1:41 PM
Subject: [j-nsp] Power failure - unexpected?
Hi everybody,
we´ve got an M320 with 4 power modules, a sin
agreed structure the firewall filter protect to ensure that all unwanted
connection from unless permitted in the routing-options prefix lists or terms
in the firewall family inet, all connection attempts are discarded unless
explicitly permitted.
term default-action {
then {
syslog;
dis
if system syslog configured for small file size and small rotation,
file syslog {
any info;
archive size 1m files 1;
}
A malevolent could set small file size and archive to a low number. what's
worse set a cronjob from the shell that could force reboots. Please disavow
me of my understandin
30 matches
Mail list logo
